Wife and mother, consultant helping small businesses create simple social media plans, owner of Kids in the Capital, organizer for Social Capital Conference and I blog about life in general at Karen's Chronicles.
@LauraPetrolino Jargon and vague terms that can be used against you if the situation is right. I sort of wonder if that's what happened with this coach who was fired over a photo that was deemed "immoral".
The story: http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/highschool-prep-rally/girls-basketball-coach-fired-over-facebook-photo-while-154300701.html
3 weeks, 5 days ago on How to Create a Social Media Policy that Works
I'm writing a course on developing a social media policy next spring - I'll definitely be including this post as reference material. These are really good points and practical ways to make the policy effective.
3 weeks, 6 days ago on How to Create a Social Media Policy that Works
@jono.smith @dbvickery In every instance that something like this occurs, timelines are watched to see what the brand will do and every time it shows copy/paste replies, copious screenshots pop up all over the web. Twitter can absolutely be robotic, but it doesn't have to be. I know many people and quite a few brands who don't have robotic timelines.
Besides, just because you don't see the timeline doesn't make the appearance any less sincere. This reminds me of email form letters sent from customer service departments. They're impersonal and almost always miss something key in my original inquiry that needs to be addressed. At the very least, they could have had a general message that is customized to specifically address what was said to them. If you look at the replies to their apology tweets, the copy/paste tactic was noticed repeatedly by people they replied to. A couple people even offered to help teach them how to use social media.
I agree that they handled it well...until they started copying and pasting replies.
3 weeks, 6 days ago on Home Depot Crisis: Social Media Requires Being Human
@ginidietrich I'll never understand why copy/paste is done in these situations. Every time it happens, everyone points out how ineffective and robotic is looks.
4 weeks ago on Home Depot Crisis: Social Media Requires Being Human
@CommProSuzi @Karen_C_Wilson I know the person wearing the costume was a white man. But if one of the other men in the picture was white, it would have been worse - i.e., white man, monkey, black man - which one is different? To me that's a worse implication.
I'm struggling with how to word this and not seem totally insensitive - I'll say that up front so people know that's not where I'm coming from. This was truly my thought process, though maybe I'm too naive to be allowed to have internet access.
When I first saw the picture, it literally took me some time to figure out the problem. I didn't think it was funny, which I assume was the goal. Then I realized why some were offended and my reaction was that this could easily have been an innocent mistake. You know what I think would have been FAR worse? A black guy, a white guy and the guy in the monkey suit. I wish we knew what the approvals process was. I actually saw a tweet from someone that said they weren't offended, but they wouldn't have participated in the photo.
I think part of the reason this didn't become a huge issue that stuck around is that the initial handling of the situation was good, but also because it was ambiguous whether people would even be offended by the post far and wide - it seems fairly contained. I am aware of the racist correlation between black men and monkeys but it's not the way *I* think and it definitely didn't occur to me right away because it's been years since I've even heard a reference like that in any context. So, I can see how someone might think this was a great idea and mean nothing by it. That makes the firing even worse. I think intent matters.
That professor sounds like he was a nightmare.
I've used quite a few of these, but never the video one. And it seems so logical, too. I've had to do a few where I wasn't able to get a very good read on the audience from the organizer and I will often do a poll at the beginning so I can get a better sense of the needs in the room and make adjustments on the fly.
1 month, 1 week ago on Public Speaking & Presentation Skills: Don’t Be a Robot
The tantrum wins. So funny.
1 month, 2 weeks ago on Gin and Topics: Panda Cub Gets Vaccine and Click Baby
That's so exciting!! I really enjoy reading Laura's perspectives in the comments. She's going to be an excellent addition to an already awesome team!
1 month, 2 weeks ago on #FollowFriday: Our New Client Services Director
Your dad's advice is the best part of this. @Lara Wellman and I have conversations all the time via text, FB chat, Twitter DM and other ways. We've both pulled back on topics or conversations that we didn't want preserved electronically - even via text. The potential for screenshots just really can't be overstated - from any medium.
I also have a part-time job that I pretty much barely acknowledge online - I definitely don't say who I work for. My boss knows this and trusts me not to say anything that could damage his or our organization's reputation. It's a discussion we've had many times as we watch others in similar positions do things on social media that make both of us uncomfortable. I care too much about my reputation to damage it saying foolish things online.
2 months, 2 weeks ago on Social Media Policy: When Are Your Own Opinions Not Okay?
@ginidietrich @Karen_C_Wilson LOL...so true!!
3 months, 1 week ago on Lean In: Inspiring, Empowering, and Why You Should Read It
This book has been on my "to read" list since I first heard the criticism. In some cases it sounded like sour grapes (former employees). I wanted to decide for myself. Now I just need to find time to read it.
Ten years ago I was working for a truly miserable woman. She was quite possibly the meanest person I've ever met. She was VP of the company and treated all employees (equally) badly. A colleague who'd been there for quite a long time and *hated* her job wouldn't consider leaving because she'd just married and was looking to have children soon and it wouldn't be fair to her new employer. Well, so was I. But I left anyway. The way I put it to her is that if an employer hires someone who is of a certain age, the chance of children happening (planned or not) exists - that should have no bearing on the chosen candidate's ability to do the job.
I wish women would stop letting personal life decisions have such a huge influence on professional life decisions and overall health and well-being. (My blood pressure dropped from high to normal levels immediately after leaving that job, even though I didn't have another position to go to.) And yet, I get why this happens. I'm fairly sure I was laid off because I had the audacity to have a child. And that was after three years of absolutely leaning in.
@LauraPetrolino Aww, thanks! Can't wait to hear more.
3 months, 4 weeks ago on What the Opt-Out Generation Means Longer-Term
@RebeccaTodd Thanks. :)
3 months, 4 weeks ago on The Three Things, Edition 43
@RebeccaTodd Every time I hear a man or woman (but especially women - not gonna lie) say they've felt judged for not having kids, it makes me a little bit crazy. Proof: http://karenschronicles.ca/blog/2011/11/18/you-know-what-they-say-about-assuming.html.
The first time a colleague asked me if I wanted to have kids was when I decided people just need to stop making assumptions about each other. He had no idea how touchy a subject that was for me at that particular time, nor would I have told him since he's the type to keep his woman barefoot and pregnant. That was ten years ago, and I cringe every time someone gets asked when they're getting engaged, when they're getting married, buying house, etc., etc.
Just live and let live, people. And maybe we can just talk to each other about our lives, sharing in each other's experiences rather than comparing them to see who's doing better.
4 months ago on The Three Things, Edition 43
And I should not have said that it's just men who exhibit this hypocrisy. It's women too. I've worked for them as well.
This is why working for myself is just ever so much better. :)
4 months ago on What the Opt-Out Generation Means Longer-Term
@LauraPetrolino So well said. I have had several women (and one or two men) tell me that they are too selfish to have children - with the *expectation* that I (who wanted and now have a child) would berate them for their stance. I had this conversation with someone earlier today in fact. I really don't think not wanting kids is selfish. I don't think wanting kids is selfish. I have an only child and he probably will remain an only child and I definitely feel some parents of multiple children look down on me for that, but I don't care. We're all different people and we're all going to want different things. I have my views on why that is, but it gets into one of those topics I don't discuss online, so I'll stop there.
I've been working at looking at my motivations when I criticize other business owners lately (only in my brain, usually) - especially women. Because if I'm just in a catty, competitive mood then I need to get over it. There's enough business for me out there and I can let them do their thing and I can do mine and we will both do just fine.
I couldn't agree with you more, @Lindsay Bell-Wheeler. The sense of entitlement from the women in this piece is nauseating. Most women who "opt-out" (and I heartily dislike that term) and then divorce don't have anywhere near the advantages that these women do. I think it's also telling that the salaries of the women are discussed but only one mention of child support/alimony and it doesn't discuss amounts. Not that we need to know every financial detail, but we KNOW that there has to be alimony and child support going to these women. So, they aren't really providing for their kids solely on a fraction of their original salary. To me, this is misrepresenting the picture even more.
I will say this, though - there are issues in a marriage if a woman leaves her job to save it. "All this would be easier if you didn’t work" - that statement speaks volumes for the entitlement of the husband to have his cake and eat it too - why should HE get to be the one to stay at work. Marriage should be an equal partnership and where children are involved and compromise is required, there should be give and take on both sides.
You know, I think what happened to your mom and other women like her sucks big time. There's been a lot of talk about this (particularly in Canada; I'm not sure about the U.S.) and how we put a value on the work that stay-at-home parents do (cuz it isn't just moms, even if they are the majority still). The discussion of this topic started long before this article reared its ugly head. When tax time comes, there's no income to report, but there is certainly value. Anyone who reads your description of what your mother did in those years of raising you can see that there is amazing value there.
What *I* think needs to happen is for society - ESPECIALLY employers - to recognize that value. I know many women who love motherhood more passionately than any job they've ever had. They stay home with their kids and they do an amazing job raising the next generation. Goodness knows, that was not for me. Not because I don't love being a mother, but because I love to work, but not that kind of work. I get energized by the challenges in an office. I got totally drained by the challenges of keeping a child busy all day. I don't want that for myself, but shouldn't women or men who do have that choice?
What I find truly astounding is that I have known men who think that a woman's place is at home raising her kids, but they would also turn around and deny employment to a qualified woman who made that choice. The hypocrisy is insulting and it's why this is a problem. I agree that women should invest in themselves, but I would hope that one day they can do that and retain the option of staying home if that's the choice they want to make.
I feel like you've reaffirmed a decision we made last week NOT to go with one of these time-sensitive deals. Ultimately, there were too many big question marks that we couldn't answer in the time we had to decide to purchase. I felt strongly enough that we could do the same thing cheaper with current tools and I think we'll end up with something just as good.
Also, I really dislike time-sensitive deals like this. If you're only giving me 48 hours to decide, you clearly don't want to give me ample time to do my research. Two weeks, a month - totally reasonable. Two days? That always raises a big red flag. I don't like making panic decisions just to get a good price. I definitely feel cynical that way - we should start a club.
4 months, 1 week ago on Business Lessons Learned: Remember to Watch Your Step